Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[viper37]

Another is the large degree of variation in precautions to avoid becoming infected.

that and the inherent risks to some professions.  Someone who's working from home does not share the same risks as, say, a nurse or a doctor working in a hospital dedicated to covid place.

Although there are statiscal ways to deal with your sample and/or adjust the results accordingly, I have no idea if they dealt with this variable in selecting their sample.

[viper37]

For reasons I explained minutes after he lifted the mask mandate. Liberals should listen to me more.

I have missed that post, sorry.  Sometimes, I come back to the forum and there's 10 new pages in this thread, so I skip a few

But yeah, I guess they should listen to you more often.  When are you planning to jump on the active politics field?

[DGuller]

But yeah, I guess they should listen to you more often.

Let's not go overboard here.

[Sheilbh]

US reports of very rare adverse effects in young people (heart inflammation/myocarditis). These have been observed about four days after mRNA vaccination (they've not specified which one or if it's both) in predominately young male adults and teenagers - but there's no causal link. Apparently this was also observed in Israel and the Israeli authorities have been looking into it.

It seems like authorities are takiing the right steps and hopefully the response to this will be a bit more measured than the blood clotting and involve less sudden u-turns:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/23/cdc-studying-reports-of-heart-inflammation-in-young-covid-vaccine-recipients

It feels like it might just end up being listed as an extremely rare side effect and we're just aware of how this is done/discovered with these rare side effects because of how important the vaccines are.

[Zanza]

When you vaccinate hundreds of millions and closely track all possible side effects, you are bound to find some rare conditions.

[Sheilbh]

When you vaccinate hundreds of millions and closely track all possible side effects, you are bound to find some rare conditions.

Yeah - and especially with a disease that is really linked to age those side effects are probably going to be more noticeable in young people where there is more of a risk/benefit consideration to be done. But if the disease is going to be around in the world (so isolation alone isn't going to be sufficient because this won't die down) it will generally and on a social level be worth the risk of an extremely rare side effect.

Having said that I'm still not sure whether it'll actually be necessary or advisable for kids just given the attention it'll get v vaccination campaigns for diseases which are far more dangeorus to them like measles..

[Zanza]

Measles was actually made mandatory in Germany last year for children and employees in certain jobs (healthcare, care homes, teachers...).  As only a combined vaccines exists, that means mumps and rubella (and sometimes pertussis) are de facto mandatory.

We had just 74% coverage for measles in two year old children  when 95% is needed.

There is no final decision yet by the Constitutional Court on this though.

[Sheilbh]

Interesting - I think in the UK it's generally about 85% but as you say the target is 95%. Hancock had talked about considering making certain vaccines - such as MMR - mandatory to attend school. But that was before the pandemic and I imagine it's not been a huge focus for the Health Department. I think Australia has a "no jab, no pay" policy where it's mandatory to get child benefits/tax credits.

I've no idea with the Constitutional Court (which obviously wouldn't be an issue here) but I imagine the key issue is proportionality.

I wonder if vaccine enthusiasm for covid will actually have a knock-on effect. I know that in polling trust in vaccine safety is highest in low-income countries, possibly because they have a real and visible impact. In wealthy countries where those diseases are under control and treatable there's more concerns about safety - maybe because we can afford it. But now everyone is wanting/needing a vaccine and it is making a big difference. I mean maybe it won't have an impact but I wonder if it will reduce anti-vaxx sentiment.

[Tamas]

US reports of very rare adverse effects in young people (heart inflammation/myocarditis). These have been observed about four days after mRNA vaccination (they've not specified which one or if it's both) in predominately young male adults and teenagers - but there's no causal link. Apparently this was also observed in Israel and the Israeli authorities have been looking into it.

It seems like authorities are takiing the right steps and hopefully the response to this will be a bit more measured than the blood clotting and involve less sudden u-turns:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/23/cdc-studying-reports-of-heart-inflammation-in-young-covid-vaccine-recipients

It feels like it might just end up being listed as an extremely rare side effect and we're just aware of how this is done/discovered with these rare side effects because of how important the vaccines are.

Yeah I happened on reading about that when I was looking up things for my dad. He has just been diagnosed a couple of weeks ago with an early phase of one of the irregular heart rhythm things. I am quite certain the first signs of it (getting tired more quickly) started before his Pfizer shots, but the symptoms getting more noticeable definitely coincided with his jabs especially the second one, so he can't shake some suspicion. It for sure has nothing to do with the above though, quite different symptoms.

[Syt]

I assume people will just be a lot more alert to symptoms they normally wouldn't pay much attention to following the vaccination, leading to the discovery of conditions or illnesses that would otherwise have gone unnoticed.

[Legbiter]

There's a significant uptick in the birth rate here in Iceland, people seem to have found ways to kill time during the pandemic. 

[Sheilbh]

The Indian variants are continuing to spread in the UK. But there's two sides that are quite interesting now.

One is that we probably need to start moving away from national measures to not very local measures (including surge testing etc) because there's huge variance now that infections are broadly under control. Nationwide we're at about 25 cases per 100k (with some local authorities at nearly 0). But in some areas where the Indian variant has arrived it's much, much higher - so in Bolton it's about 380 per 100k.

The other side is that - so far - it looks like vaccines are working and it's mainly spreading among the young and least vaccinated because the UK's approach is more or less entirely based on age. So this isn't Indian variant specific but is all covid cases in Bolton:


Obviously under 50s are being vaccinated now (we're down to the 32+) but they're less likely to have been vaccinated plus two weeks. And this makes me wonder if we're reaching the point where actually we don't do anything - because the over 50s and healthcare workers were 99% of the covid deaths in the UK. So even though there's an outbreak here if that isn't likely to result in deaths because the people at risk of serious or fatal cases aren't getting it, do we need to do anything? From what I understand there's been an increase in hospitalisation but it's quite small and not spiking like case numbers are - which is what you'd expect given that it's mainly infecting younger people.

It feels like we're possibly at the point where actually case numbers, with a large proportion of the vulnerable vaccinated, don't matter so much any more because they're no longer as linked to hospitalisations a fortnight later and deaths a fortnight after that. I get there's a risk of a variant developing that escapes the vaccines but I feel like unless there's an outbreak that is escaping vaccines there's no reason to maintain restrictions to avoid a risk of that variant emerging anymore than we have restrictions to prevent a risk of another infectious disease.

[mongers]

The Indian variants are continuing to spread in the UK. But there's two sides that are quite interesting now.

One is that we probably need to start moving away from national measures to not very local measures (including surge testing etc) because there's huge variance now that infections are broadly under control. Nationwide we're at about 25 cases per 100k (with some local authorities at nearly 0). But in some areas where the Indian variant has arrived it's much, much higher - so in Bolton it's about 380 per 100k.

The other side is that - so far - it looks like vaccines are working and it's mainly spreading among the young and least vaccinated because the UK's approach is more or less entirely based on age. So this isn't Indian variant specific but is all covid cases in Bolton:


Obviously under 50s are being vaccinated now (we're down to the 32+) but they're less likely to have been vaccinated plus two weeks. And this makes me wonder if we're reaching the point where actually we don't do anything - because the over 50s and healthcare workers were 99% of the covid deaths in the UK. So even though there's an outbreak here if that isn't likely to result in deaths because the people at risk of serious or fatal cases aren't getting it, do we need to do anything? From what I understand there's been an increase in hospitalisation but it's quite small and not spiking like case numbers are - which is what you'd expect given that it's mainly infecting younger people.

It feels like we're possibly at the point where actually case numbers, with a large proportion of the vulnerable vaccinated, don't matter so much any more because they're no longer as linked to hospitalisations a fortnight later and deaths a fortnight after that. I get there's a risk of a variant developing that escapes the vaccines but I feel like unless there's an outbreak that is escaping vaccines there's no reason to maintain restrictions to avoid a risk of that variant emerging anymore than we have restrictions to prevent a risk of another infectious disease.

So learning to live with a low level Covid-19 epidemic?

Until such time as it might develop a 'killer' variant or when the next coronavirus attacks the human population?

[Sheilbh]

So learning to live with a low level Covid-19 epidemic?

Until such time as it might develop a 'killer' variant or when the next coronavirus attacks the human population?

Yeah - covid becoming endemic rather than an epidemic and it's like we live with lots of other infectious diseases because they don't kill enough people to shut down society. I think that's how almost all pandemics/epidemics end - when the death toll falls to a level that society can tolerate. I'm wondering if we're approaching that point (for countries with lots of vaccines - and the key is to get the vaccine to everyone in the world) - and it's worth keeping an eye on Bolton and it's very early days.

This is where I wonder if the flu comparison finally becomes apt. These vaccines are better but I've always thought this would end up like flu - it's in circulation, most people will be protected with booster shots for their vaccines, some people will die every year but it'll be a relatively small amount (in the UK flu is about 10,000 deaths a year on average).

But yeah basically we move on from this disease until there's a variant that escapes the vaccines or until the next coronavirus jumps from a pangolin to a bat to a human - or maybe the next one will be a flu making the leap.

[Valmy]

But yeah, I guess they should listen to you more often.  When are you planning to jump on the active politics field?

I doubt I would ever serve in any capacity beyond local government, and that is probably only after the kids are gone.